Is this a dead module?

Let’s just get something straight.

I haven’t complained about this module or razbam at all before. I find it kind of disturbing that certain types of people start coming out of the woodwork to attempt to shill for third party devs as soon as any criticism is made.

That being said - yes people complain WAY too much about early access problems.

And as I stated before - I have every single module so I am aware of the concept of early access and what to expect from them.

I didn’t complain about the mirage at all because it was early access and despite its teething trouble early on, it was and is a functional module. What I mean by that is that it’s primary operational function can be fulfilled. Of course there are systems missing or bugged but I see the mirage as something that has its core systems working and I love the module.

I also love the Harrier. It’s my favourite module in dcs. That is why I don’t want it to die.

If you reread the OP I tried to convey the fact I WANT this to work out for Razbam (however that may or may not have come across because i wrote it at 2am).

There are not just broken or non implemented systems with the Harrier however. There are wrongly implemented systems with no acknowledgment of the issue and despite oceans of data provided that shows exactly how they should work.

Data provided by customers that love the module so much they invested large amounts of time in research to correct it. For free!

To the user that made a list of items implemented in the last 3 months - how many of those items actually work?

For me the biggest game breaker at the moment is the non functional CCRP and the non functional ripple release.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The one thing that is obvious is the change in pace. We see there's a longer development queue than Mirage 2000 post release days. For myself, there's no amount of words from other people who know as much as myself, that can convince me that the Harrier has as much development effort as it did at release. If Razbam choose to appease this notion, that's up to them, it will have very little effect on my confidence, the trend is written in history. The net effect is that I can judge EA to have a longer time to complete, and it's going slower, which means I view their EA releases differently from now on when considering purchases. It's a learning period both sides.

Let’s just get something straight.

I haven’t complained about this module or razbam at all before. I find it kind of disturbing that certain types of people start coming out of the woodwork to attempt to shill for third party devs as soon as any criticism is made.

That being said - yes people complain WAY too much about early access problems.

And as I stated before - I have every single module so I am aware of the concept of early access and what to expect from them.

 

I didn’t complain about the mirage at all because it was early access and despite its teething trouble early on, it was and is a functional module. What I mean by that is that it’s primary operational function can be fulfilled. Of course there are systems missing or bugged but I see the mirage as something that has its core systems working and I love the module.

 

I also love the Harrier. It’s my favourite module in dcs. That is why I don’t want it to die.

If you reread the OP I tried to convey the fact I WANT this to work out for Razbam (however that may or may not have come across because i wrote it at 2am).

 

There are not just broken or non implemented systems with the Harrier however. There are wrongly implemented systems with no acknowledgment of the issue and despite oceans of data provided that shows exactly how they should work.

Data provided by customers that love the module so much they invested large amounts of time in research to correct it. For free!

 

To the user that made a list of items implemented in the last 3 months - how many of those items actually work?

 

For me the biggest game breaker at the moment is the non functional CCRP and the non functional ripple release.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Schilling" is not the same as disagreeing. Although it is a really nice strawman you made there. :)

When I buy an EA module, I accept a "slow pace" of development, I know what I signed up for. If I didn't want to deal with unfinished modules, I would avoid EA items all together. I suggest you avoid early access modules in the future if you are unhappy with the pace of things.

I don't really have a problem with the rate of updates. I mean it is not the same as though you were given a date it was going to be complete by. Personally I'd rather play a feature incomplete module like the AV-8B NA or F/A-18C now than have to be stuck waiting for them to be finished. I mean I waited years for the F/A-18C since it was announced to finally just come into Early Access 2 months ago.

The question I would pose is should ED set a list of requirements for modules to enter Early Access?

Comparing elephant to a fly lol.

 

If you really want to compare the entire ED company + Belsimtek to Razbam during summer season as equals there is something wrong in your logic and way of thinking.

 

Current stuff that they're working on (INS) and so on, takes long ass time to code.

You whining about it won't change that.

Nothing wrong in my logic. As a new customer, all I see is what I pay for and what I get. I paid for the Harrier, knew it would take a while but I did not expect this length of time. Certainly the F18 has more resources behind it but customers buying in the DCS shop do not know that. I paid the same amount of money for both modules, one is being finished quite quickly and has lots of update information and the other does not.

There is also a world of difference between whining and complaining. I offered a solution to making customers happier: publish what you are going to fix and when, and stick to it. This would cost nothing.

My post DOES have the chance to change the situation, particularly if lots of others feel the same way and also post: that is the nature of free speech and the internet. If I say nothing, then things will definitely NOT change.

"Schilling" is not the same as disagreeing. Although it is a really nice strawman you made there. :)

 

 

 

When I buy an EA module, I accept a "slow pace" of development, I know what I signed up for. If I didn't want to deal with unfinished modules, I would avoid EA items all together. I suggest you avoid early access modules in the future if you are unhappy with the pace of things.

That's not what a strawman argument means and 'muh logical fallacy' arguements make me yawn.

You have yet to refute a point except "early access"

Low Energy, SAD!

Tarawa updates are not harrier updates

Oh, look, the drama club is back in session =)

When a module launches into early access, you should expect it's going to be at least another year or two finishing up.

When I buy an EA module, I accept a "slow pace" of development, I know what I signed up for. If I didn't want to deal with unfinished modules, I would avoid EA items all together. I suggest you avoid early access modules in the future if you are unhappy with the pace of things.

It's looks like Razbam moved to their next module!

 

Soon on preorder

Try telling M-2000C pilots that it's only a matter of time before it's done. Released status...not done...nor is it likely ever to be. ...But hey, it's great to see those photos of the F-15E ejection seat...

I share the same conclusion and opinion as Sarajov and John. I'm quite concerned about how Razbam handle development products.

The Mirage is almost three years old, has left the "Early Access" status but still lack some features and has some serious bugs that lead to CTD. I'm glad they secure an agreement with 2/5 but I'm now curious to see how it will ends.

I do understand they have plenty of people working on 3D models and textures, but I think they have only two guys working on systems and flight models. How these guys can handle the Mirage, the Harrier, the MiG-19, the MiG-23 and the F-15 ? Just how ?

I bought the Mirage and still wait for it to be completed. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

That's not what a strawman argument means and 'muh logical fallacy' arguements make me yawn.

 

You have yet to refute a point except "early access"

Low Energy, SAD!

 

Tarawa updates are not harrier updates

Hey, it's not my job to sell it to you or make you happy. I gave you my opinion, take it or leave it. I can see from the quality of your response that you aren't worth talking to. Good day.

What is actually wrong with the M2000C?

Only thing I can think of is lack of A2G terrain radar that is being held up because they choose to wait for ED to release their A2G Radar. That and some modes on the PCA that had no info available. Maybe with their relationship with Armée de l'air they can implement whatever functionality is unknown. I mean they literally have a post on Facebook of one of them sitting in the actual M2000C simulator. Same for the Super Tucano IIRC.

Really though I've been pretty satisfied with the Mirage.

TL;DR.

Is this a dead module?

No. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=204693&page=2

TL;DR.

 

 

 

 

 

No. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=204693&page=2

Thanks for proving my point.

No significant updates for months - flipping the direction of a switch throw and fixing a course line that was broken... wew.

UFC data entry I guess you could consider some work into the module but it doesn't actually work properly and hasn't received any bug fixes since.

TL;DR - Some people will defend anything just to conform.

What is actually wrong with the M2000C?

 

Only thing I can think of is lack of A2G terrain radar that is being held up because they choose to wait for ED to release their A2G Radar. That and some modes on the PCA that had no info available. Maybe with their relationship with Armée de l'air they can implement whatever functionality is unknown. I mean they literally have a post on Facebook of one of them sitting in the actual M2000C simulator. Same for the Super Tucano IIRC.

 

Really though I've been pretty satisfied with the Mirage.

Yeah as I also said , I have no problems with the mirage in waiting for new features as it works right now (or at least I think so).

I do understand they have plenty of people working on 3D models and textures, but I think they have only two guys working on systems and flight models. How these guys can handle the Mirage, the Harrier, the MiG-19, the MiG-23 and the F-15 ? Just how?.

Yes , this is the major problem and no communication from Razbam about update or future update.

What is actually wrong with the M2000C?

 

Only thing I can think of is lack of A2G terrain radar that is being held up because they choose to wait for ED to release their A2G Radar. Really though I've been pretty satisfied with the Mirage.

I know maybe It is a bit off-topic, but I think it's relevant since we are talking about Razbam. Just to be clear: I do not own early access modules and I have no intention to buy One. I can be fine with some bugs that Need refinement, but I do not tolerate systems missing or changing during development, and I like to have a completed manual to study. So I wait until a module is declared complete. Modules I own are all from ED / BST, and some of them are not fully completed and bug free, even if no more EA (uh-1h for example), but all the main systems work and they are fully usable. Now, I'm not very interested in m2000 but I'm a lot in Av-8b, and I'm waiting to buy because It is EA. M2000 instead is fully released, so I'd like to know what to expect from a Razbam module sold as complete. Is it Just functional with some minor bugs you Can live with even if never addressed, or are a lot of systems missing / severe bugs present? According to A/G radar, if Razbam has modeled c version with RDI radar, It has not A/G capabilities; only early versions with RDM radar have some. If a relevant function as A/G radar is scheduled but not yet implemented, you cannot move a module out of EA! If so, I can't trust Razbam...

No, is not dead.

This thread is.

This thread is.

It seems pretty much alive to me.

You will see in a couple of posts more where it derails.

I have every module except the new Yak, I understand how early access works - thanks.

I don't have a problem with slow dev time - I have a problem when the devs are unable to acknowledge problems in the basic concept of how the systems actually work.

 

Early access also implies that it is in active development - no real updates or fixes in 3 months or so at this rate, if I'm wrong - prove me wrong.

The module is still in development and is being worked on, would you rather the devs continue to develop and spend time coding the module or sitting trawling through the forums looking to reply to threads. 99% of the improvements are posted on the facebook page, normally with screen shots to boot.

I know the Devs and they are always working on improvements. Yes this is early access and things will break and have to be re-done, even to the point of having to be re-do stuff due to game coding change requirements.

So please cut them some slack.

Cheers Specter

The OP is right. Reported issues via many channels - not a single confirmation or response from the developer. Very unprofessional.

No, is not dead.

 

This thread is.

Clearly not if people contine to post in it..

The module is still in development and is being worked on, would you rather the devs continue to develop and spend time coding the module or sitting trawling through the forums looking to reply to threads. 99% of the improvements are posted on the facebook page, normally with screen shots to boot.

 

 

 

I know the Devs and they are always working on improvements. Yes this is early access and things will break and have to be re-done, even to the point of having to be re-do stuff due to game coding change requirements.

 

 

So please cut them some slack.

 

 

Cheers Specter

I would just prefer that they made the systems on the harrier work. That may mean using information from the forums in order to complete that task. Your question is a false dichotomy.

So please cut them some slack.

I have done by waiting this long to make a complaint but the radio silence, lack of updates and inability to confirm that systems have problems or need to be redesigned does not fill me with confidence.

And trust me, I really want them to succeed.

CCIP and Auto are the basis of any ground attack aircraft, and after a couple of years the very foundations of both are broken in the Harrier.

I suppose they had two options they could postpone the release so it was more feature complete and we probably still wouldn’t have the harrier yet if that was the case. Or they release early access which for me personally I was quite happy with, just experiencing a VTOL aircraft and perfecting landings and takeoffs was something I was very much looking forward to, but we’re all different in what we want and I guess these guys were dammed if they released or didn’t there was always going to be people on the forums venting their frustration whatever they did. Personally I have a positive feeling with Razbam as I’ve always been a bit supporter of the Mirage I think it’s a really well put together module and it runs great, there’s a few issues with it still but it’s by far the most detailed simulation of a M2000 available when you consider all the features that are available now so yeah I feel confident Razbam will eventually deliver with the Harrier.

You will see in a couple of posts more where it derails.

Well, I have been here long enough to know a thread usualy derails when You drop by and start with this drill or directly asking to close it. Please, stop that, we have dedicated moderators. You are not contributing to the debate, nor making any clarification or improvement.

As a Harrier and M2Kc owner I would like to see some other customer opinions. Even if they are not expresed in the most appropiate way (allways a minority!!) thats not an excuse to close it.

Personaly, I think this module is far from dead as the tittle suggests. But I share every claim made in first post and there is complete understanding of the EA process. You will never see me asking for a release date or complaining if one is missed, but I will need to see a 'F-18 Early Acces' level of regular information flow in order to throw my money into another EA developement.

What I didn't learn from my experience with the C-101 or reading about the M2kc developement, I'm doing now with the Harrier.

I have no doubt they will deliver. However, more transparency and a reliable timetable of the module development would be much appreciated.

Communication matters.